Somewhat related: On a much smaller scale this is what @genex is doing with the San Francisco Selfie League. It’d be much easier for him to just pick games at FGW (where everybody plays) for the league, but he’s picking smaller locations that not everyone knows about. So we’re all forced to visit pizza places and bars that we wouldn’t otherwise hit up for pinball. It’ll hopefully be great for growing pinball throughout the city rather than concentrating play at one or two locations.
I see the upcoming PAPA circuit as doing the same thing on a national scale.
I just listened to @pinwizj and @Coast2CoastPinball discuss this on the podcast. I thought the discussion about what the PAPA team wants the circuit to be was really interesting.
For those who didn’t listen, the thought that PAPA Circuit could be a “pro tour” with one event per month focusing on the top players is one interesting route. But that route isn’t necessarily compatible with drawing in new players or allowing people to vote on events.
So what do the PAPA folks (@mhs@PAPA_Doug others on here? @bkerins ? ) view as the ultimate purpose of the circuit? Is it like WPPRs where you have two or more goals that sometimes conflict? I just think it would be interesting to know where you’re trying to take this in the long term.
i was wondering about that as well but wasn’t sure if I was looking in the right place. I am all about promoting new events locations but if the event itself end up “small” there is little incentive to spent 1k to travel there.
I am not sure I have seen that said like this, though I am pretty sure I did not read all the forum. I am all about getting feedback from people but as we have seen in the UK when internet people are getting free reign on naming a boat, it just end up being some random nonsense :)grin:
There are like better way to get feedback from the public and if the goal is to get non players too (which open ballot stuffing by random, I did not want to but I ll reach out to all my non pinball French friends next year then ) why not but there should be some guidelines around the process.
Maybe sub diving by “region” if the goal of the circuit is to get a good representation nation wide? PNW can fight for one or two their tournament that meets the 2015-16 requirements and so could CA.
Wouldn’t trying to balance the number of events per region so every region as the same chance to get into the Circuit final be a priority? Looking at the current mapping of this year result it’s most likely that most circuit final participant will be east/north eastern players.
@pinwizj said =, this is a good opportunity to have a closer look on what PAPA wants to focus on for the circuit next year and take a closer look on how to get there.
Thanks, Doug and PAPA team for all you do and have done. Much appreciated!
I’m bummed that TPF17 didn’t make the upcoming Circuit by one vote. But the good news for the TPF tourney is that, similar to CAX, I don’t think it needs a boost in demand from being a Circuit event (given the 160 players from this year) relative to many other events. And I’m excited for the other events that did make it – obviously biased toward Bat City Open since I live in Austin.
Sorry that you couldn’t make it to TPF this year, Bob. The limited entry tournament ran very well and the response was overwhelmingly positive. It struck a nice balance between the tourney and allowing tourney players to have time to enjoy the festival. We grew average # of tourney players by 60% in 2016 vs 2015. And the vast majority of the 157 players fully participated (I only counted around 90 unused plays clicking through each of the bottom 60 in the standings).
I agree that this was a significant change, it wasn’t one that was taken lightly, and involved consulting multiple people in competitive pinball to ensure we chose wisely. I won’t rehash the entire situation here, but making the change prior to the event rather than completely changing the format or setting up the event for disaster was the best choice. We won’t put ourselves in that position again next year.
For TPF17, we will be considering changes such as:
increasing # entries by increasing # of tourney pins, along with having the time to test out the cool customization that Karl wrote for us in DTM to constrain how many pins from each era are considered for a player’s standing.
adding 1-2 side events
creating a true “novice” finals by having A division finals, B division finals, and novice finals for those ranked below 3,000 (??) in IFPA rankings.
Agree. This is a huge ommision in my mind, no matter what caused it. I wonder if certain regions should be guaranteed at least one event. For all that those folks do for the hobby, both conpetitively and in general, I’d like to see them get at least one event each year. It’s the friggin pinball capital of the universe. Deciding which areas get guaranteed events could be tough. Texas?
Portland’s influence has radiated outward. From BC, to Colorado to San Diego, numbers have continued to grow over the years. Tournaments, leagues, location games and collectors. Could be the fastest growing pinball area of the universe. Why not keep that growth going?
They’re all out playing on location. Probably don’t care.
d;^)
I used to be very active in SCCA (sports car club of America). The competition was intense. There were local events. There was also a Divisional Series where for example, the Southeast Div Series would have 4-5 events all over the SE. Then there was a National Tour. That consisted of 10-12 events spread across the country. Then there was the week long Nationals held in Topeka Kansas every year. I feel like the Papa Circuit is like the National Tour. Maybe there could be some Divisional action as well? Just food for thought.
i think a regional model has been mentioned before, dividing the US in regions and having a set number of events each region tournament voted in.
But that is up to PAPA to decide what are their goals and what to prioritize I would think. Bringing new tournaments to reach new players, assuring a consistent presence in all region…?
Plenty of options I am sure will be reviewed for the next round. I can’t say I am happy with what the result was this time for the PNW but it brought out a lot of good discussions for the future.
Groovy. As long as the data is reasonably explained by binomial distributions, you’re getting decent data. That’s often not the case, which is where binary question become more useful. As someone living overseas, I was unable to participate in any PAPA circuit events this last year, so was suggesting a ‘minimum possible survey’.
@PAPA_Doug: I’m not suggesting alternative voting systems to bash on you. I’m just trying to make suggestions for the future that might help you accomplish your goals better. Any system you use will be biased in some way; the question is only ‘does the bias of the system we’re using fit our goals’. @pinwizj talks about the conflicting goals of WPPRs all the time, and how they’ve tweaked their system to meet their goals. It’s not totally clear what the goals of the PAPA circuit are (as discussed on @Coast2CoastPinball’s podcast), so it’s not totally obvious what system for choosing events is optimal. If PAPA/RF’s happy with the outcome, great! Otherwise, change some stuff for next year, and do it again…
Not complaining, just curious. Thanks to Doug, Mark and the whole PAPA crew for being so thoughtful about improving the PAPA Circuit nomination process.
K15 Open and LED Festival of Lights did not pass our vetting process. Expo was removed from Circuit for 16-17 so you can’t just nominate another tournament at your event to get by that.
The PAPA Circuit is multi-purposed. Most people think it has to be one thing or the other (usually a professional series created solely for the best players), but that was never the case. In no particular order:
Highlight and place attention on the best tournaments in the world.
Help pinball grow in areas that otherwise don’t have major events, sometimes by highlighting smaller events or lesser-known locations.
Help bring new players into the community.
Provide feedback to events and help directors recognize their players’ opinions matter.
Leverage the process and platform that has been built in order to test, create, and / or implement new rules, strategies, videos, formats, advertising techniques, or as of yet undiscovered opportunities.
Some decisions that have been made (and will be made) are more focused on one specific area, and the balance of the goals listed above will naturally shift from year to year, and in some cases, event to event, based on the opportunities that arise and the perpetual give and take with the community. Some years the schedule will be taken up primarily with the biggest and best tournaments. Other years the Circuit will have more smaller events and will be focused on growth in a different way. This doesn’t mean the overall purpose or goals of the PAPA Circuit have changed or are random, it just means the natural ebb and flow inherent in managing a complex platform is running its course. There will always be give and take, and if there wasn’t, it would likely die off.
In other words, PAPA Circuit is many things, and we do it for multiple reasons. To try and limit ourselves to one sole purpose would be either an incomplete generalization, or it would be a half-assed use of the wide-ranging platform that’s being created. If you insist on a generalization, the purpose of PAPA Circuit is to make people play more pinball and have fun.
If all goes well, the Circuit will move around to many new places and revisit many pinball hotbeds over the years. I have no doubt it will be back at Expo, the northwest tournaments, florida, and others in years to come, not to mention all of the new locations that will filter in and out over the years. With every new year comes a new opportunity.
) why not but there should be some guidelines around the process.